Dismissed

The State of Mah and Ors. v. Abhiman Ravji Johare

Bombay HC19 Apr 2017FA/4403/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order dismisses multiple First Appeals filed by the State of Maharashtra regarding compensation for land acquisition for the Waghur Dam project. The High Court held the appeals to be without substance, upholding the Reference Court's valuation and dismissal of stay applications accordingly.

What did the court decide?

All First Appeals are dismissed; the impugned compensation awards and valuations are upheld; pending stay Civil Applications are also disposed of.

The State of Mah and Ors. Vs Abhiman Ravji Johare — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

F.A. St.No.2896/2013 connected matters.

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.2896/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4215/2013

¶5

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Abhiman Ravji Johare

¶8

Shri S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for appellants Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for respondent

¶9

WITH

¶10

FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.2900/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4217/2013

¶11

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶12

VERSUS

¶13

Sakharbai Chindhu Koli

¶14

Shri S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for appellants Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for respondent

¶15

WITH

¶16

FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.2903/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4219/2013 IN

¶17

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶18

VERSUS

¶19

Supdu Shenfadu Sonawane

¶20

Shri S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for appellants

¶21

F.A. St.No.2896/2013 connected matters.

¶22

¶23

Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for respondent

¶24

WITH

¶25

FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.2892/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4221/2013

¶26

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶27

VERSUS

¶28

Venubai Natthu Pawar & ors.

¶29

Shri S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for appellants Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for respondents

¶30

WITH

¶31

FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.2889/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4225/2013

¶32

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶33

VERSUS

¶34

Sukalal Rajaram Patil

¶35

Shri S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for appellants Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for respondent

¶36

WITH

¶37

FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.2884/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4228/2013

¶38

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶39

VERSUS

¶40

Anandabai Dhondu Patil

¶41

Shri S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for appellants Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for respondent

¶42

F.A. St.No.2896/2013 connected matters.

¶43

¶44

WITH

¶45

FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.2878/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4230/2013

¶46

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

¶47

VERSUS

¶48

Atmaram Shankar Patil & anr.

¶49

Shri S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for appellants Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for respondents

¶50

CORAM: V.K. JADHAV, J.

¶51

DATED: 19th April, 2017.

¶52

ORAL ORDER :

¶53

All these Appeals deal with acquisition of the house properties of the claimants on account of submergence of area under Waghur Dam.

¶54

A group of First Appeals bearing First Appeal No.3060 of 2013 with connected First Appeals came to be disposed of by this Court (Coram : S.V. Gangapurwala, J.) vide judgment and order dated 19/12/2013, thereby upholding the valuation made by the Reference Court in respect of the land at Rs.600/- per R, however, had granted enhancement of compensation in respect of the structures, wherein the Valuer's report was considered by

¶55

F.A. St.No.2896/2013 connected matters.

¶56

¶57

this Court and had deducted 10% from the said Valuer's report. In para 7, 8 and 9, it was observed as under :

¶58

"7. The Court has appreciated the evidence on record and had come to the conclusion that he accepts the valuation report. But then no reason is given for deducting the amount in some of the matters upto 60% to 75% and in majority of matters 25%.

¶59

There may be some error. To work out the said margin of error, some deduction would be permissible from the amount as suggested by the Valuer. Considering the fact that. the properties acquired are lands and small houses the margin of error would also be less.

¶60

In the light of the above, it would be appropriate to deduct 10% from the valuation as shown by the expert.

¶61

In a group of First Appeals bearing First Appeal No.2745/2015 with connected First Appeals, this Court (Coram : S.V. Gangapurwala, J.), vide judgment and order dated 21/10/2015, disposed of the said Appeals arising out of the same project and the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court in the light of the observations made earlier as referred in para No.2 of this order, bearing First Appeal No.3060/2013 with

¶62

F.A. St.No.2896/2013 connected matters.

¶63

¶64

connected First Appeals.

¶65

In view of above, there is no reason to take any other view. There is no substance in the First Appeals. All the First Appeals are thus liable to be dismissed and they are accordingly dismissed.

¶66

In view of dismissal of First Appeals, pending Civil Applications seeking stay are also disposed of.

¶67

fmp/

The State of Mah and Ors. v. Abhiman Ravji Johare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Mah and Ors. v. Abhiman Ravji Johare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Kisan Khandu Bade and Anr.

Pandhari Hari Mang Died Thr Lrs Chandrakant and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

The State of Maha. Vs Krishna Dhondiba Nagargoje

The State of Mah and Ors. Vs Sukalal Rajaram Patil

Sakubai Rajaram Manore Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Mah Thr Collector and Ors. Vs Bhagwan Pandhari Patil